how to build an engaging story around the game mechanic?

hey peepz,


i'm nearing completion of my very first unity game,
but i find myself staling and hesitating.

there's 2 things that keep bugging me,
keeping me from wrapping it up.

i read a lot on this forum and watch a lot of GDC and Unite talks on YouTube.
And what all good games have and mine has not, is story.

no story, no context, just a simple puzzle game.

and without story, it's more like the "2048" clone vs. the original game "threes".
it has no context, no reason to care, no depth, only an interesting mechanic.

while, in fact, i can think of many stories that would "explain" why you would want to search for certain color sequences in a box. (you are a jewerel apprentice; you are a priest trying to please a picky god; ...)

i just don't know how to translate these vague ideas into a design, into a story, into something that is appealing.
with my limited graphical skills i can't make drawings or animated movies of priests and jeweler shops. and even if i could, it wouldnt fit the minimalistic theme.

and just a textbox with words, well, zZZzzZzZzz...

my second problem is with the tutorial, but that's a whole different subject.
and i think that solving the first problem, would automatically help with the tutorial issue.

so, it's a puzzle game, you swipe the right colors for points.
here is a screenshot, for some "context".

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B7La_ae_jIpzTFNSX2tvMUlKcGs/view?usp=sharing

how can i make this come alive?

i've been looking at other minimalist art and games and examples. and they all seem to be able to translate complex ideas in 1 or 2 simple images or words.

so hard!

help?

 

If you can't think of a story, I wouldn't worry too much about it. There are games like Zelda that really need a story to make sense, but then there is Flappy Bird which was a huge hit but if there was a story I don't know what the hell it is.

 

There isn't much difference between a story and a game anyway, it's generally a character facing obstacle it will overcome to get closer to a main goal. You can literally map the beat of your game to a story.

 

Oh boy, there's a lot to unpack here. If you got to a point where you are almost finished before really thinking about story, then it was never important and will never be important. A story that is integral to the game and a "story" that's just an infodump of context are two very different things.

If you are unsure about how to teach people the mechanics, I would highly recommend The Witness as it's one of the best examples of wordless tutorials you'll find.

 

I won't post it myself because it's a little blue for this site, but I highly recommend Googling "John Carmack Story" and read what he has so famously said about it.

 

*LOL* looked it up

for me, my first instinct, is also: it's just a puzzle game. why worry about such a thing? a tile is a tile is a tile. people will get it.

but i hear/read/see talks (by people with experience and knowhow) repeating that it is important, that it is the thing that builds retention and makes fans. so, i didnt want to dismiss it so easily.

also this, this SOUNDS right; But when I watch GDC post mortems, there are actually quite a few great games, where the story only came later, when the game was well in development. or where the initial story was dumped and replaced by something different.

---

but you all seem to agree with my initial feelilng: dont worry about it.

so maybe i should stop watching talks and just finish the bloody game! ;-)

 

Theme, yes.

Story, not so much.

 

what's the difference?

 

Theme is like the setting, look, feel, aesthetics, sounds, and over all vibe of the game.

Story is a series of narrated events.

So, you have a game like Bust-a-Move:



Fantastic game! Excellent execution with bright colors, interesting characters, great sound design, and mesmerizing animations.

The whole game pops and fits well into its self. Every component is all on board with this over all theme.

BUT, no story.

And frankly it flat out does not need one.

Forcing the player to sit there and have a series of screen between them and the meat is pointless.

No one cares what the motives are behind Bubble Bobble Dragon's actions.

No one cares how popping bubbles are going to help it move towards its goals.

No one cares who is in the way of those goals and why.

No one cares how the characters grow and change along the way.

And a lot of great games are like that.

When the designers feels ABSOLUTELY compelled to shoehorn a story into the game they do it as minimalistic as possible. That's why you have so many characters saving damsels in distress.

Hell, Ghosts N Goblins nailed it with a 5 second long cut scene.

You and some girl are sitting on the grass and a demon shows up and carries her off. DONE!

 

ok, then i used the wrong words. i don't mean a series of narrated events. i mean theme. sorry for using confusing language. i get them mixed up. (story vs theme vs context vs setting)

to use your example, bust-a-move (which is indeed a great casual game)

the main mechanic is removing circles from the top by aiming at them with other circles on the bottom.
but they turned the circles into balloons
and the removing of circles became popping of balloons
and the aiming is "assisted" by a little dude..

they gave it "context" by doing those things. it's no longer a purely abstract action. (i'm sorry, i really dont know the right words)

"No one cares how popping bubbles are going to help it move towards its goals."

i disagree. making the circles into bubbels does matter. maybe we dont realise it as a player, but it is much more satisfying to pop a ballon then to just hit the right circle in the right place. why else would i bother doing all that aiming if it wasnt for that sattisfying balloon-popping?

even when you talk about the game. "hey i played a fun game where you pop balloons with other balloons" is much more enticing then "hey, i played this fun game where you have to remove circles from the screen by aiming other circles at them".


"That's why you have so many characters saving damsels in distress."
not a fan. but let's not get into that discussion. the internet might explode. ;-)

 

I want to carefully mention something relevant to the original post. The tired "save the damsel in distress" trope provides an "essential experience" that appeals to specific demographics. (I'm using Jesse Schell's definition of "essential experience" from Art of Game Design.) Essential experience is the emotional state that the designer wants the player to feel. Some designers, for better or worse, decide they want to give players that essential experience.

Story, theme, context, and setting all contribute to the essential experience -- or, badly done, detract from the essential experience.

Flappy Bird's essential experience is a lighthearted, goofy, but frantic hand-eye challenge. The art supports this. Flappy is nothing if not goofy-looking. And the softness of the bird contrasts with the hardness of the obstacles you have to avoid. The gameplay doesn't punish you by making you wait a long time to try again. And the simple mechanic is based on vision, coordination, and timing, instead of, say, deep strategy or narrative decisions.

Even if you don't have a story (and it sounds like this game shouldn't have one), you can reinforce the essential experience with color choices, animation, and sound effects, as well as other surrounding things such as menus and loading screens.

So what essential experience do you want to convey to the player?

 

Threes is a good example. It doesn't have a story or even really a theme, but it does have personality and a lively presentation. Each unique number is presented as a different character with different personalities via unique animations and voices.

You may be better off thinking about "presentation" and "polish." You can do a lot with lively particle effects, animated wipes, animated pieces/backgrounds, and the right sound effects and music. Even just the right song or two can make the experience memorable. Maybe have one or more characters that appear between stages. It doesn't necessarily need a theme, and in fact that could even detract from the game, depending on how well or poorly you pull it off.

Plants vs Zombies is a good example of a game that had a consistent theme. But it takes quite a lot to pull that off. I'm thinking one of the advantages of doing an abstract puzzle game is that you don't necessarily need a huge mountain of art assets.

 

What's your game look like now?

Maybe we can help with suggestions.

Personally, I think that pixel art would stand out in the genre.

 

there's a screenshot if you click on the link in my first post.

 

good question. i don't know.

it's a game about finding color sequences. the fun - for me - is in the pattern recognition. the challenge in searching and eventually finding.

if you talk about experience, do you mean "emotion"? i dont know what emotion to connect to this. it's not something to be sad or happy about. there are no people/creatures to care about.

 

But still they give their cards a name and character traits.
For instance:
http://images.pocketgamer.co.uk/FCKEditorFiles//threes-android.jpg

i dont really get "why".

with my limited skills i'm always balancing "either do it and do it as good as possible within my skills" or if my skills are insufficient: "don't do it at all because having something bad is worse then having nothing".

but then i think about flappy bird. which - in my humble opinion - really is a bad game. but FB was still able to get millions of plays. even google cloned it! it's weird.

"Maybe have one or more characters that appear between stages" that's not a bad idea, and that would work with "simple" art. i will try if i can do something with that.

true..

about that art. I did 5 years in art school. Was able to make good quality paintings/drawings.
But when I try something digital with the Wacom tablet, I can't draw a single "ok" thing, even if my life depended on it.
i can do some basic vector art, if it's not too complex. but ofcourse this doesn't compare - not even a little bit - with a true artists.

budget is a huge limiting factor. but, *should* i make some small income with this one, there will be budget in the next game. a few games down the line, there might even be enough budget for a real artist. that would be awesome!

 

You can have a feeling without a character story. The game prune is contemplative. Its austere visuals and distinctive color palette are evocative of Japanese visual art, which is intentional. The essential experience is like the meditative act of examining a bonsai tree and pruning it to help bring forth its true nature.



Compare that to the cacophony of Bejeweled, which is just lots and lots of shiny. The images, colors, animation, and sounds add excitement to a format might feel dry and analytic if the jewels were only flat, static color-coded squares. It makes the game more fun to pick up and play for a few minutes of lighthearted fun.



It's fun and encourages faster play to get the reward of more colors and sounds, but it absolutely doesn't fit the experience that a game like prune tries to convey.

 

It's "flavor" and puts a smile on your face. Unless you're a Vulcan or something.

Something "good enough" that's actually releasable in my mind is infinitely better than something never finished. Even $100 million dollar games have limitations. Everything doesn't have to be optimal and in many cases players simply don't care about the stuff you think is important, as long as they're engaged.

Can you elaborate? Why do you think Flappy Bird is a bad game?

Sounds like you just need some more time with the tools. In the meantime, if you can produce traditional art, why not do that and scan it in? Could be a more unique look than a lot of game art.

I have no idea how solo devs make money on games in 2017. I'm only a hobbyist, so I don't have to worry about such things. Putting even *more* money into the development might not always be the best plan (but sometimes it is!). The mobile market in particular baffles me.

 

yeah, that's true.

I was going to say bad graphics, but i just googled a screenshot and it's not as terrible as i remember.
But also, the controls, the depth, ...

But probably most because, even after a hundred tries, i was never able to get beyond the first obstacle.
So that might be a personal hangup.

yeah, maybe i should spend some more time training/working on graphics.

i just get more satisfaction from coding then from working on graphics or sound. they are both a slow process which is often a waste of time as the result is just not good enough and i have to restart. in coding i just code it and it's there. instant result. instant satisfaction.

yeah, it baffles me too.

even as a player, i've noticed how different i approach desktop games vs mobile games. it took a few years before i understood that free games are free for a reason and that my complaint of 'there are no fun mobile games' was because of my reluctance to pay for games. now i don't look for free games, i look for good games, and just buy them. i prefer paying for a game and getting a good experience over not paying and playing the waiting-game that is so prevelant in most popular free games.

most of my friends are still in that first fase. (like a lot of people i guess). they are reluctant to pay for mobile games or apps. even when they say they love the game or app and use it daily. and yet they complain about privacy or crappy products.

but, i guess the market will catch up in a few years. it's still young.

 

Wauw! Prune is beautiful! I didn't know that one.
it's the sort of graphics i prefer, not the chaotic view of bejeweled.

Gonna try it!

 

Gamasutra just reposted the developer's postmortem of Prune that you might be interested in reading.

 

Consider an indirect narrative. Your game uses solid colors, clean edges and basic shapes, which I would say lends itself to abstract concepts. Your game could present itself as an analogy of dreaming, for example. This sort of analogy can be implied with simple imagery and effects.

Imagine that the title screen has the name of the game, a 'Start' button, and a little image of a robot walking along, all on a white background like the one in your screen shot. When the player presses the button, the title goes away, and the view zooms in on the robot's head, while the robot gradually fades away and the view of the first level fades in, with the game play starting after this little animation finishes.

Suddenly, your game is now a robot executing its program. This shows just how little could be done to add an indirect narrative, and it does a lot to give your game character and distinction. This is just one example, of course.

 

that's a really nice example. i see what you mean.
the game is already in the store by now, but your example will surely help me in the future.

i need to work and think a little on this, but i believe something similar should be within my skills.
and i could add it in an update.

thanks!